If it’s feature complete, a keyboard doesn’t need regular updates. According to the other thread it’s not feature complete, so it could be abandoned. Since it’s FOSS any enthusiastic person could stop it from being abandoned.
Oh, yes. Absolutely. The “this software is newer therefore better” or “it gets more updates so I know it’s better software” affirmations make about as much sense as “my complete rewrite of Shakespeare’s work using a vocabulary of 200 words is better because it is newer” or “this mathematical proof uses more paper, so I know it’s better”.
This “argumentum ad novitatem” fallacy grinds my gear almost as much as the “argumentum ad populum” one…
Unfortunately, both argumentations are really common in FOSS (and in software in general). 😑
If it’s feature complete, a keyboard doesn’t need regular updates. According to the other thread it’s not feature complete, so it could be abandoned. Since it’s FOSS any enthusiastic person could stop it from being abandoned.
expired
I agree in this case.
But there’s a narrative that software needs regular updates or it’s worthless, but some things are just done and stable.
Oh, yes. Absolutely. The “this software is newer therefore better” or “it gets more updates so I know it’s better software” affirmations make about as much sense as “my complete rewrite of Shakespeare’s work using a vocabulary of 200 words is better because it is newer” or “this mathematical proof uses more paper, so I know it’s better”.
This “argumentum ad novitatem” fallacy grinds my gear almost as much as the “argumentum ad populum” one…
Unfortunately, both argumentations are really common in FOSS (and in software in general). 😑